A Second Politics Forum is Needed

[BluffTHIS!]

More of snowtrollball's typical lying trolling by not distinguishing between actual just cause and a falsely called "just cause". Cyrus would be so proud of you.

[Myrtle]

[ QUOTE ]
More of snowtrollball's typical lying trolling by not distinguishing between actual just cause and a falsely called "just cause". Cyrus would be so proud of you.

[/ QUOTE ]


Bluff,

If I were you, I'd back off.

You were just hoisted by your own petard by Snowball.

....when you're in a hole, you should stop digging.

[BluffTHIS!]

Myrtle,

No such thing happened and I'm not backing off his lying trolling.

[[Phill]]

I thought your reply was pretty good. I considered calling you out on the bit about rights for women due that post you made in the Brandi thread where you basically condoned raping strippers, but felt like letting it go.

[ QUOTE ]
More of snowtrollball's typical lying trolling by not distinguishing between actual just cause and a falsely called "just cause". Cyrus would be so proud of you.

[/ QUOTE ]

The trouble with this bit is who defines an actual just cause as apose to a false just cause?

[egocidal]

I can guarantee Snow and Bluff would wither away and die without each other. Just get it over with and book a motel room you two lovebirds.

[PokerBob]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Bluff,

Are you a racist?

[/ QUOTE ]


I don't believe I am, nor that anyone can prove same from my postings. While posters like snowtroll and other might like to label me as such because of my aggressive views on radical Islamists, I can and have rationally back up my views.

I will give an example of what is or isn't racist. It isn't racist to state that a race or religion, or sub-part thereof, possesses various unattractive qualities or defects, *as long as there is strong grounds in truth to make that assertion*. What is racist is to extend that to an individual member of such a group without proof, or to seek to deny the group as a whole or its members, basic civil rights without just cause.

I will also be more specific regarding my views on Islam. I believe that those Moslems who support terrorism and other actions deemed reprehensible like the abuse of women, constitutes a far greater percentage of Islam than the PC liberals of the west would like to believe (their prime fault is an inability to distinguish between the truth of the way things are with the way they would like them to be). And furthermore, even if such constitutes a minority of Moslems, *if that supposed majority will not denounce the radical members and actions of their co-religionists and take action against such radicals themselves*, then we non-Moslems must act as if the radicals and their supporters in fact constitute a majority, because we cannot and should not allow ourselves and third parties to suffer their violence because we might collaterally harm those who supposedly don't support the radical terrorists, but also won't denounce or take action against the radicals themselves, whether because they truly do support them or are too cowardly to act.

[/ QUOTE ]

i laughed.

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
I thought your reply was pretty good. I considered calling you out on the bit about rights for women due that post you made in the Brandi thread where you basically condoned raping strippers, but felt like letting it go.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol. You said you weren't going to "call me out" and then mentioned your skewed interpretation and the event anyway. I never condoned raping strippers. I said that prostitutes weren't as deserving of as much sympathy when raped as other women, but that the perpetrators should still be given the max punishment (see SMP thread since the Brandi one disappeared).


[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
More of snowtrollball's typical lying trolling by not distinguishing between actual just cause and a falsely called "just cause". Cyrus would be so proud of you.

[/ QUOTE ]

The trouble with this bit is who defines an actual just cause as apose to a false just cause?

[/ QUOTE ]


And that question is the basis for a thread in a rough and tumble politics forum, not this forum about other forums, and not in the current political forum where that topic might generate too many testy replies and offend the Spinster Manners Sisters.

[hmkpoker]

I hate to say this, but I think the second politics forum should just be the AC forum. We have a very significant number of posters who post about AC/Austrian economics (pro and con), and an overwhelming number of people (often newcomers) who think that this kind of talk has no place in the politics forum.

I'm putting the logical implications of this aside because they do not matter. If so many people are complaining that posts on anarchy do not belong in politics, then perhaps we should just have an AC forum. It's better than having no politics forum at all, imho.

[[Phill]]

I volunteer to mod the ACism Forum.

As an added bonus, i promise to make no posts in it other than those explaining my mod actions.

Ironically, i think id be pretty good and i dont think id need to do much modding. Win win.